The Saiga wont use stock AK mags. You need to do a conversion on the Saiga and it aint cheap.
I think the Casar had the hole for the PG already there so you just attatch a pistol grip.
I was looking at the Casars and they look pretty well built, better that the Wasrs ive looked at.

No, you dont have to do a full conversion on a Saiga just to run AK mags, just add a Dinzag bullet guide $20, and file or dremel a couple of mm off the mag catch. Then any com-Bloc mag fits and works fine. The conversions for saigas are to move the trigger group back forward, not needed just to run AK mags...You can always get a Tapco stock with PG that will fit on a stock Saiga without conversion, too....like I have on mine.

Not sure how this bad info on Saiga still gets out, go to www.forum.saiga-12.com to learn everything that is true about saigas...

I have the inter ordnance ioinc CASAR AK-47. I installed the tapco pistol grip and tried the hi-cap magazines and they fit just fine. I also removed the stock to install an adjustable m4 stock for the ak. But i have not yet fired the gun! Lol

I hope that you did not install +10 round mags with a PG installed. That would be a felony! Also, what type of mag lock did you install before you installed the PG? Did you get a NFA tax stamp before you manufactured an AOW? Or, are you just making it easy for the feds to prosicute you for violating Federal Laws?

I have the inter ordnance ioinc CASAR AK-47. I installed the tapco pistol grip and tried the hi-cap magazines and they fit just fine. I also removed the stock to install an adjustable m4 stock for the ak. But i have not yet fired the gun! Lol

Wheres the stock on your ak? Is this a pistol? Oh is that a bipod or foregrip?

I have the inter ordnance ioinc CASAR AK-47. I installed the tapco pistol grip and tried the hi-cap magazines and they fit just fine. I also removed the stock to install an adjustable m4 stock for the ak. But i have not yet fired the gun! Lol

Ya.....you might want to take that picture down Chief....not a good idea.
Read and learn before you "build."

__________________"The bitterness of poor quality is remembered long after the sweetness of low price has faded from memory...."

I have the inter ordnance ioinc CASAR AK-47. I installed the tapco pistol grip and tried the hi-cap magazines and they fit just fine. I also removed the stock to install an adjustable m4 stock for the ak. But i have not yet fired the gun! Lol

Does anybody know if this particular rifle can have a PG added back onto it?

Regarding the IOINC Casar, I asked them in the store (at Turners) about the pistol grip and was given an emphatic "NO, that'll make it an illegal firearm."

However, I didn't ask them at the time if I put a bullet button on first, would it then be legal.

But if I understand California law correctly, certain receivers are banned from California, regardless of whether they have pistol grips or not. In other words, if the IOINC Casar is an "onlist" banned receiver, it is illegal regardless of whether it has a pistol grip or not, and regardless of whether it has a bullet button/magazine lock or not.

Thus, assuming my understanding of the law is correct, you could add a bullet button and then a pistol grip to this "legal" rifle and it would still be legal.

Well, I ordered one of these from Turners, and just today received it (An IOINC Casar 7.62 x 39 automatic rifle) from Turners--without the pistol grip or bullet button.

When I got it home and looked at it, it appeared that the model number on the receiver had been ground off. As a result, it's impossible to ascertain whether it's an illegal, on-list receiver or not.

Though Turner's claims this is CA-legal, I'm not sure that it actually is. Grinding off the model number of a previously illegal receiver seems....illegal.

In addition, the rifle is bent, causing the sight to be bent as well. I'm taking it back tomorrow due to the bent sight--and to see if all of these so-called "California-legal" receivers are legal--being made legal simply because they have the receiver identification ground off.

It should still say IO Inc. CASAR and the serial number, correct? It's not listed as a CA AW in that case that's for sure. What do you mean "it's bent"? It's built off of a Romanian parts kit, and those are notorious for having "canted" front sight bases. PM me a pic of the markings and where they ground down if you like. They did gring the markings off of the front trunnion, which is fine, before they put it together.

I can take a Romanian AK parts kit, build it on a US receiver, throw in some US parts and I too can say it's made in the US. That can mean anything...."US made", "made in the US".

I think what IO means is they are building their rifles from Romanian AK parts kits on US receivers, barrels and furniture, and calling them US made, since they are no longer ordering fully built rifles from Cugir in Romania any more (due to quality control issues). To call something US Made, not all the components are required to be made in the US.

__________________
Life can make you do many things, even kiss a man with a runny nose.- Mihail Timofeevič Kalašnikov -

It should still say IO Inc. CASAR and the serial number, correct? It's not listed as a CA AW in that case that's for sure. What do you mean "it's bent"? It's built off of a Romanian parts kit, and those are notorious for having "canted" front sight bases. PM me a pic of the markings and where they ground down if you like. They did gring the markings off of the front trunnion, which is fine, before they put it together.

I've sent the rifle back due to the canted sight.

The most forward part of the receiver's underside is ground off. Immediately posterior to it is "7.62 x 39". Posterior to that it has IOinc, followed by the serial number (on the side closest to the trigger.)

I was told in the store that grinding off the model number of the receiver actually makes it legal.

It should still say IO Inc. CASAR and the serial number, correct? It's not listed as a CA AW in that case that's for sure.

I think I need to clarify what I was asking. The place on the receiver where the model number used to be was ground off. I was actually told this was originally an illegal receiver, but grinding off the model number made it California legal.

The model number may have originally been either of the 3 IOInc. banned models--AK-47, RPG, or M-97. But again, the original model number marking on the receiver has been ground off. And it has not been overwritten. There is simply a rough, ground off area where the model number used to be. It's the same on all of the "California-Legal" IOInc Casars.

However, on the left side of the front trunion (which is riveted to the receiver), it says something like "IO CASAR." (I don't remember the exact letters, since I've sent the rifle back to fix the canted sight.)

To my knowledge, the front trunion is not considered part of the receiver. If I'm right about that, then the IO CASAR marking on the trunion would be irrelevant to determining whether the receiver is California-legal or not.

My question is whether grinding off the model number of an illegal receiver makes it legal.

IO seem to have built the CASAR (CAlifornia Semi-Automatic Rifle) on their standard IO AK-47C receivers, for the CA market. As an importer and FFL07 manufacturer they can call and mark their receivers with whatever model designation they want, as long as that name / model #, and serial # are logged into their BATF records as such at the time of production.

__________________
Life can make you do many things, even kiss a man with a runny nose.- Mihail Timofeevič Kalašnikov -

IO seem to have built the CASAR (CAlifornia Semi-Automatic Rifle) on their standard IO AK-47C receivers, for the CA market. As an importer and FFL07 manufacturer they can call and mark their receivers with whatever model designation they want, as long as that name / model #, and serial # are logged into their BATF records as such at the time of production.

Bigthaiboy,

Thanks for your reponse. I suspected it must be something like that, considering how big an operation Turners' is.

So what would be the best choice now????????????? They have it for 569 at turners!

Call me a total NEWB but which one would be best from Henderson Industries??????? I live in Los Angeles County...
Thanks

The least expensive from Henderson's is (or was) the Century GP 1975. The 1st one I bought from them had problems and I had to send it back. But Henderson replaced it almost immediately with another one, which seems to be working quite well.

The last I checked, however, they were out of Century GP 1975's.

But Henderson is very good about returns. They got a replacement rifle out to me before my 10-day waiting period had expired.